It's actually a 9:7 majority against allowing that kind of racism, with 7 wanting users like you muted and 2 wanting users like you banned. And yet you received nothing more than a warning and are still protesting against it. Fuck along, little buddy.

is utter horseshit, lol. It's admittedly not a big deal, but if I didn't warn all those jerk-offs back when they were constantly calling me a bitch and a cunt and spewing various other shit because "insulting was not against the rules" then Claw doesn't merit a warning for saying "nigger", because "racism isn't against the rules", whether you like him or not. I'm reversing it.

It's actually a 9:7 majority against allowing that kind of racism, with 7 wanting users like you muted and 2 wanting users like you banned. And yet you received nothing more than a warning and are still protesting against it. Fuck along, little buddy.

is utter horseshit, lol. It's admittedly not a big deal, but if I didn't warn all those jerk-offs back when they were constantly calling me a bitch and a cunt and spewing various other shit because "insulting was not against the rules" then Claw doesn't merit a warning for saying "nigger", because "racism isn't against the rules", whether you like him or not. I'm reversing it.

Expected. Hahahhahahah.

Da sex must be that good between these two...

Must be nice having a pocket bitch to come to his rescue when he cries.

Sent from my Motorola DynaTAC 8000X using Tapatalk

« Last Edit: June 12, 2015, 05:38:42 PM by EviL~Ryu »

Logged

-Administrator of Clan EviL-Developer (Trivia Development and Analytics)

It's actually a 9:7 majority against allowing that kind of racism, with 7 wanting users like you muted and 2 wanting users like you banned. And yet you received nothing more than a warning and are still protesting against it. Fuck along, little buddy.

is utter horseshit, lol. It's admittedly not a big deal, but if I didn't warn all those jerk-offs back when they were constantly calling me a bitch and a cunt and spewing various other shit because "insulting was not against the rules" then Claw doesn't merit a warning for saying "nigger", because "racism isn't against the rules", whether you like him or not. I'm reversing it.

It's actually a 9:7 majority against allowing that kind of racism, with 7 wanting users like you muted and 2 wanting users like you banned. And yet you received nothing more than a warning and are still protesting against it. Fuck along, little buddy.

is utter horseshit, lol. It's admittedly not a big deal, but if I didn't warn all those jerk-offs back when they were constantly calling me a bitch and a cunt and spewing various other shit because "insulting was not against the rules" then Claw doesn't merit a warning for saying "nigger", because "racism isn't against the rules", whether you like him or not. I'm reversing it.

Expected. Hahahhahahah.

Da sex must be that good between these two...

Must be nice having a pocket bitch to come to his rescue when he cries.

all you have to do is find the people who voted on "permban" and convince them to vote on "mute". the law cant be "reversed" so i wont be punished for the current niggers, but all the future niggers should and will be punished then.

how can you be a lawyer and not grasp the concept of rules? youre the troll here. I was against most of the rules presented by il, but i said specifically - i can adapt as long as they will be followed. the logic is there, take your time

There were 9 people that voted for racism to be punished. There were 7 people that voted for it not to be punished. You actually agree with Claw's jerk-off logic that "democracy" therefore says it shouldn't be punished, despite there being a majority saying it should be? That is asinine. You prefer to deliberately ignore the voters' statement that they want to punish racism, simply because they voted for two separate punishments - when the warning system we use doesn't employ either of those punishments anyway? Why would we do that? Simply to emulate some broken systems that exist in the real world? I'm incredulous here.

It's actually a 9:7 majority against allowing that kind of racism, with 7 wanting users like you muted and 2 wanting users like you banned. And yet you received nothing more than a warning and are still protesting against it. Fuck along, little buddy.

is utter horseshit, lol. It's admittedly not a big deal, but if I didn't warn all those jerk-offs back when they were constantly calling me a bitch and a cunt and spewing various other shit because "insulting was not against the rules" then Claw doesn't merit a warning for saying "nigger", because "racism isn't against the rules", whether you like him or not. I'm reversing it.

Expected. Hahahhahahah.

Da sex must be that good between these two...

Must be nice having a pocket bitch to come to his rescue when he cries.

Yes, really. How can you not see this? We don't mute or ban (except for repeated offenses), so who cares which punishment people voted for? I can't believe you're publicly calling out my logic as horseshit when it's, you know, common fucking sense imo.

Oh, a majority of people wanted to punish for this, but since they voted for two separate punishments, then we'd better just do the complete opposite of what they voted for and allow it! <--- apparently NOT horseshit logic.

Using that logic you may change any vote REGARDLESS OF NUMBERS (as you do here) for example because you consider some of the votes "trollish", or "not serious". You've already tried doing that in the "should other clients be closed" poll, where the option "allow all" has won. apparently its YOU who doesnt respect polls and their numbers, all you care about is to have things done your way

It's actually a 9:7 majority against allowing that kind of racism, with 7 wanting users like you muted and 2 wanting users like you banned. And yet you received nothing more than a warning and are still protesting against it. Fuck along, little buddy.

is utter horseshit, lol. It's admittedly not a big deal, but if I didn't warn all those jerk-offs back when they were constantly calling me a bitch and a cunt and spewing various other shit because "insulting was not against the rules" then Claw doesn't merit a warning for saying "nigger", because "racism isn't against the rules", whether you like him or not. I'm reversing it.

Expected. Hahahhahahah.

Da sex must be that good between these two...

Must be nice having a pocket bitch to come to his rescue when he cries.

all you have to do is find the people who voted on "permban" and convince them to vote on "mute". the law cant be "reversed" so i wont be punished for the current niggers, but all the future niggers should and will be punished then.

how can you be a lawyer and not grasp the concept of rules? youre the troll here. I was against most of the rules presented by il, but i said specifically - i can adapt as long as they will be followed. the logic is there, take your time

This is not how all democratic systems work! In fact, what you're suggesting is a known flawed system and there's no reason for us to adhere to it.

whats stopping you from asking the permban voters to change their vote? Or, if theres more than 2 options regarding a specific case, pick two options with the most votes and have people vote? there's really no simpler thing than direct democracy

actually, i believe there was a possibility to vote for TWO of the options, so muting+banning was an option. that makes your claims even more retarded

whats stopping you from asking the permban voters to change their vote? Or, if theres more than 2 options regarding a specific case, pick two options with the most votes and have people vote? there's really no simpler thing than direct democracy

Why should they have to? Let everyone vote for what they most want. The people voting for bans have made their opinion clear, they do NOT think racism should be permitted. Do you suggest we just pretend we're morons who can't understand that, or idiots who can't add? Why should we do that?